This article concerns the development of archaeology and museology, in the Ottoman Empire, Turkey, and Greece, through the life and career of Théodore Macridy. Macridy participated in knowledge transfer in more than one discipline and more than one country. Through his links with Western academic circles in archaeology and museology, he made a significant contribution to their development in the Ottoman Empire, Turkey, and Greece. Living between the Ottoman and Greek epistemic communities as an Ottoman citizen of Greek origin, he excavated numerous sites of the Ottoman Empire, worked at the Ottoman Imperial Museum, and contributed to the foundation of the Benaki Museum in Athens at the end of his career. This makes him a good example of an Ottoman Greek scholar whose liminal identity led to his relative neglect in both Greek and Turkish archaeology and museology.

This article takes issue with the common view that the early Turkish Republic (1920-1940) followed a “special” route to modernity characterized by “state capitalism.” It argues that such a view, rooted in the Sonderweg paradigm, obscures the historical-comparative specificity of Turkish state formation, leading to problematic conclusions about the character of Turkish modernization. Based on insights derived from Karl Polanyi’s notion of “economistic fallacy” and Political Marxism’s conception of capitalism, I offer a new interpretation of the early Republican project in Turkey, which, in turn, provides a deeper understanding of the social content, tempo and multi-linearity of world historical development.

This paper argues that the class-based analyses that seek to make sense of the recent transformation of Turkish modernity rest on a pre-given duality between the state and the bourgeoisie. This not only jettisons the relational and temporal context in which classes define and articulate their interests, thereby leading to determinist explanations of various sorts, but also obscures the historical distinctiveness and mutual re-transformation of two different modes of socio-spatial organization, modernity and capitalism, in Turkey. Based on a novel historical materialist method known as Political Marxism, I suggest that re-conceptualizing class as property-relations sheds new light on the historical-comparative specificity of Turkish modernity, which, in turn, leads to a radical re-interpretation of Turkey’s recent transformation.